System and method for dynamic adaptive user-based prioritization and display of electronic messages

ABSTRACT

A method and system that dynamically ranks electronic messages based on their situational and inherent dimensions, which are judged by a set of filters. These filters evaluate the different elemental metadata constituting a message and produce a priority value based on filters relevance and importance. The system iterates through queued messages, examine the structured content for expected attributes, statistically analyze unstructured content, apply dynamically weighted rules and policies to deliver a priority ranking, and then display the message and its vital attributes in accordance with the priority ranking. The system also adaptive learns and adjusts its weighted rules and policies to permit priority ranking to change on real-time or interval-based (may be user-defined) schedule. The system includes a GUI for increasing reading and processing efficiency. The GUI performs supervised and unsupervised learning from the user&#39;s behaviors, and displays messages in accordance with their priority classification.

CLAIM OF PRIORITY

This application claims the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C. §119(e)of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/576,937, filed Jun. 4, 2004,titled “System and Method for Processing Electronic Messages and ViewingResults Thereof,” U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/577,238, filedJun. 4, 2004, titled “Dynamic Prioritization and Displaying of QueuedMessages,” and U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/577,107, filed Jun.4, 2004, titled “Dynamic Adaptive User-Based Prioritization ofElectronic Messages.” Each of these priority provisional applicationsare hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.

FIELD OF INVENTION

The present invention relates to electronic message processing andprioritization, and in particular to a prioritization system andmethodology that designates a ranking of electronic messages.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Various types of electronic message formats are available forcommunicating information among distributed computers for the purpose oftopical discussion or topical informational sharing. This may includeVoice Mail, Electronic Mail, Instant Message conversations, alerts,meeting requests and confirmations, task assignments, organization-widedocument search and web search results.

Currently, people spend a considerable amount of time to read, manage,and process the increasing number of electronic messages they receivefrom a wide variety of sources. It is often impossible to give the sameattention to each of these messages. Most of the computer software incharge of the management of messages displays basic information—whichmight be compared to an envelope in a mailbox. However, a large amountof information that might help the recipient to identify whether amessage is important or not is not visible by looking at the envelope(this may include source, destination, intermediate paths, andsensitivity of the electronic message). Indeed, most of the crucialinformation of a letter is in the letter itself. A typical email user isusually forced to select or double-click on a message to see its content(or full content), one message at a time. In one of the embodiments,both the summarized content, and the security context of severalmessages arranged in a prioritized visual display fashion, are presentedto the user at the same time

In conventional methods, the value associated and therefore the orderfor further processing is based on limited number of attributes such asthe source and the time of delivery. The coupling of these attributes isthen used to sort the order in which these messages are displayed foranalysis and/or processing. In the prior art, the sorted order ofmessages is typically not the order in which a typical user arranges hisor her priorities. A paradox results; while intended to make a user'sinteraction easier and increase his/her productivity, the existing artignores or fails to systematically account for the human cognitivebehavior of document processing, or what a specific user is doingmentally as they decide what messages within a message queue are worthpursuing.

In the prior art a limited consideration is made to Inherent Prioritywith loose analysis on Situational Priority (terms defined below). Thisresults in a false and inaccurate prioritization as compared to theactual or desired perception of the recipient.

However, in order to gain productivity, the requirement of mostelectronic message users is to process messages according to their ownrelevance and importance needs (including individual's own logic,interest, work culture and policies, user schedule and work habits).This will vary over a period of time and will widely differ from oneuser to another. In one of the embodiments, the.

Further, missing from the art is a system that learns from, and adaptsitself to, a user's prioritization needs. Such a system has increasedsystem accuracy and reliability as compared to the static cognitivemodels. The present invention can satisfy one or more of these and otherneeds.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to adaptive, user-based prioritization ofelectronic messages. In accordance with one aspect of the invention, amessage queue is monitored for the receipt of an electronic message. Thehistorical information and content analysis of the received electronicmessage is parsed, and statistical data is extracted from the message.Filter analysis is performed on the extracted data and a messageprioritization score is calculated. Multiple received messages aredisplayed in an order based on their respective prioritization score.Feedback of a user interaction with the electronic messaging system isanalyzed and to learn the user's behavior so as to adapt the messageparsing and filter analysis. The adapted message parsing and filteranalysis is used to recalculate the prioritization score.

Embodiments are disclosed which provide systems and methods fordynamically ordering messages by priority, introducing an algorithm thatcan be integrated with any existing art message clients or can be anindependent message client by itself. This ordering is accomplished bycarefully analyzing the different message attributes a recipient may useto categorize and prioritize the message. Taking these attributes as aninput, a unique priority value representing a message can be computed sothat a set of messages can be ranked.

A second embodiment seeks to provide a simple user interface thatdisplays all the information required to process most of the messageswithout opening them (i.e., without viewing their entire body/content).

Another embodiment will improve the message management experience froman end-user perspective by increasing message reading and analysisproductivity, improving response effectiveness and ultimately reducingthe time & effort spent reviewing large volume of electronic messages.

In another embodiment, a dynamic message prioritization systemadaptively learns by assigning weight to rules in proportion to theirsignal strength and time.

The application of these embodiments can be extended to any kind ofelectronic message: Electronic Mail, Instant Message conversations,alerts, meeting requests and confirmations, task assignments, Voicemail, organization-wide document search and web search results

These and other aspects, features, steps and advantages can be furtherappreciated from the accompanying figures and description of certainillustrative embodiments.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWING FIGURES

FIG. 1 illustrates an embodiment of a system for dynamic prioritizationand displaying of queued messages;

FIG. 2 illustrates a flow diagram for a message parsing process inaccordance with an embodiment of the invention;

FIG. 3 illustrates a flow diagram for a portion of the processillustrated in FIG. 2;

FIG. 4 illustrates the interaction of portions of a prioritizationsystem in accordance with an embodiment of the invention;

FIG. 5 illustrates a flow diagram for a prioritization algorithm inaccordance with an embodiment of the invention;

FIG. 6 illustrates a process of calculating Situational and Inherentpriority in accordance with an embodiment of the invention;

FIG. 7 is a graphical representation of representative results from theSituational calculation illustrated in FIG. 6;

FIG. 8 illustrates a calculation process utilizing three differentfilters for an Inherent analysis filter in accordance with an embodimentof the invention;

FIG. 9 illustrates a hierarchy of an Inherent filter in accordance withan embodiment of the invention;

FIGS. 10-18 are graphical representations of Lifecycle Priority-Timecurves for various categories of messages in accordance with anembodiment of the invention;

FIG. 19 illustrates the flow of data received from, and sent to,external modules by a GUI in accordance with an embodiment of theinvention;

FIG. 20 illustrates a main GUI for a message viewing application;

FIG. 21 depicts different areas within the GUI illustrated in FIG. 20;

FIG. 22 depicts the different portions within the message summary areadepicted in FIG. 20;

FIG. 23 illustrates a look-and-feel for the message window and toolbarof FIG. 20;

FIG. 23 a depicts an individual message window area containing acomplete message and an application specific toolbar in accordance withan embodiment of the invention and

Table I discloses various types of Inherent filters in accordance withdescribed embodiments of the invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE ILLUSTRATIVE EMBODIMENTS

By way of overview and introduction, presented and described areembodiments of a dynamically adaptive electronic message prioritizationsystem that displays electronic messages based on a user'sprioritization. In one embodiment, the system dynamically ordersmessages by priority using an algorithm that can be integrated with anyexisting art message clients. The system can be an independent messageclient by itself. This ordering is accomplished by carefully analyzingthe different message attributes a recipient may use to categorize andprioritize the message. Taking these attributes as an input, a uniquepriority value representing a message can be computed so that a set ofmessages can be ranked.

Embodiments of the invention can be characterized by one or more of thefollowing points:

a) A method of prioritizing and organizing unstructured electronicmessages based on both content (Inherent) and contextual (Situational)analysis.

b) A message management process comprising receiving a message andpresenting a user-friendly interface for indicating a message importanceand value with respect to historically evaluated rules and policies.

c) A model and implementation method for determining message priority,including decisions based on at least one of message relevance andmessage importance.

d) A system and method of a learning module that observes end-userbehavior and induces patterns in re-prioritization behavior; wherein thepatterns can be used to adjust existing prioritization logic or add newlogic.

e) Adaptation of the message prioritization scheme over time, based onactions taken by individuals and actions taken by groups of individualscategorized by type or work organization. Individual end-users thereforebenefit not only from learning derived from their own ongoing use of theproduct but also from work done by other users.

f) A graphical user interface that facilitates the user's reading andprocessing efficiency, work planning and understanding of user's workbehavior.

g) A graphical user interface that facilitates re-prioritization ofmessages and message components to adapt to the changing user priorities

With reference to FIG. 1, an embodiment of a system for dynamicprioritization and displaying of queued messages is depicted. A methodutilizing this embodiment includes the steps of monitoring the queuedmessages for new or removed messages [101] and [102]; new messages areprocessed and analyzed [103]. Example: If the user has set up some junkor spam filtering rules for managing his/her existing art email, thecurrent embodiment will incorporate these rules in its prioritization aswell. The analysis [103] results in numerous data points that are storedin a historical repository. This data is also fed to the PrioritizationEngine [105]. Keywords and key sentences along with contextualinformation are sent as a message summary to the GUI [106].

The repository serves as data collection to which prioritizationalgorithmic methods can be applied [104]. The prioritization method usesthe data in conjunction with weighted rules to rank the message [105].If the message has been removed from the message queue, its reference isremoved from the ranking; however, the historical data as related withthis message is not removed from the system. The message is thendisplayed on a GUI (Graphical User Interface) in accordance with therank assigned by the prioritization methodology [106]. The userinterface displays statistical and summarized information regarding eachmessage with an objective to increase the user's (message recipient's)productivity. These informational points then can be reclassified (i.e.,the value of the signal strength can be modified) through a userinterface framework and methodology [106] (supervised and unsupervisedlearning) to feed back information to an Adaptive Learning module [107]to better adapt to the users value and priorities.

1) Monitoring of Message Queue System and Process (FIG. 1 [101, 102])

The system is initially configured with known queues, respectivepath(s), and security credentials that are required to access thesequeues. The system is also given an initial starting date and time valuefrom which messages should be processed and ranked. The system processesmessages till a noted end date and time value. If configured forreal-time monitoring mode, which only requires an initial date and time,the system continuously monitors and ranks on a real-time basis. Thequeue is monitored for both new and removed messages.

2) Message Parsing System and Process (FIG. 1 [103], FIG. 2, FIG. 3)

Upon retrieving a message from the queue, the message is decomposed intoa structured entity (FIG. 1 [103], FIG. 2) and a statistical analysis[205] is performed. This analysis results in numerous data points thatare stored into a historical repository [104] and are fed to thePrioritization Engine [105]. Keywords and key sentences along withcontextual information are sent as a message summary to the GUI [106].The analysis also initially classifies type of structured content basedon known schemas. If the structure is unknown it attempts to classify itunder existing structured schema as a subclass. If it can't beclassified, the message and related information are not entered intorepository.

Once the scheme has been established, an extraction methodology andsystem is further employed to data-mine attribute values and theirrespective quantitative information. The quantitative extractionattributes may include one or more of the following:

a. Security Context: Source, Destination, Intermediate Paths,Sensitivity

b. Inherent Metadata: Priority Classification, Category, ConversationThread

c. Time Factors: Sent, Received, Transactional Qualifications,Acknowledgement

Furthermore, the extraction method and system will look at the internalunstructured content for further valuable data points. It will conductboth a quantitative and qualitative analysis on this unstructuredcontent.

The result of the extraction process updates a repository of collectedvalues [104]. This repository serves as a data collection to which aprioritization algorithmic method and system is applied [105].

After the decomposition process, summarization process [209, 213, and214], and keyword identification process [209-212, 215-217] areperformed. Keywords and key sentences along with the contextualinformation are sent as a message summary to the GUI [106].

HTML Message or PLAIN TEXT Message Box (FIG. 2 [201]):

These boxes indicate a message arrival. A distinction is made between amessage in an HTML format and a message in a Plain Text Format. Messagewritten in HTML Format need specific processing described in the TextExtraction box [202].

Text Extraction Box (FIG. 2 [202]):

Whenever a message written in HTML (Hypertext Markup Language) isreceived, it is stripped of its HTML tag elements. Removal of <script>,<body>, <head>, <html>, and <meta> tags or HTML comments is performedfor irrelevant markup.

For relevant mark up tags, data is extracted for further analysis. Theserelevant tags include those that represent:

a. Links

b. Titles

c. Font styles: bold, italic, underlined

d. Font colors

e. Font sizes

f. Meta tags: keywords, descriptions

Text Formatting Box (FIG. 2 [203], FIG. 3):

This box accepts as input, a Plain text Message or a cleaned HTML-likeMessage. The term HTML-like is used because the text might contain somerelevant tags (<b>, <font> . . . ) but is not a valid HTML document perse (i.e., no <html><head> tags). This step of the process splits thewhole text in to its components, creates the internal raw representationof a message, identifies paragraphs, sentences and words, anddistinguishes the different data types (e.g., numbers, currencies,strings, etc). Both types of message format (HTML and raw text) inputscan have the same output format. An example depicting an HTML sentenceas an input and the resulting decomposed output is shown in FIG. 3.

Linguistic Analysis Box (FIG. 2 [204]):

In this step, a linguistic analysis is performed on the message. Thisstep identifies the groups of words that are linked together and gathersinformation about the structure of the message (e.g., punctuation,etc.). Also, type errors, if present, can be processed so that thestatistics apply to the real words and not to a misspelled word.

Statistical Analysis Box (FIG. 2 [205]):

The statistical analysis box provides the mathematical results that areused to extract the key words, and/or sentences and/or links. Statisticsare kept per word and/or kept per group of words. At this point somewords can be identified as being blank words (i.e., common words in alanguage).

Keywords Identification Box (FIG. 2 [206]):

Now that the words or group of words are scored, the key words can beidentified. Key words depend on different factors:

a. Score of that specific word in user's keywords database (high,medium, low, and spam priorities) and/or

b. Score of that specific word in the message thread and/or

c. Score of that specific word in the message itself

d. Word is part of a jargon (see Content Analyzer section) [208]

Other specific keywords that refer to the text itself are identified.Particularly, keywords that refer to an HTML link (e.g., ‘link’, ‘URL’,‘site’, etc.) might be used in the prioritization process.

Keywords Display Box (FIG. 2 [207]):

This box handles the display of the key words. Key words are representedinternally in a specific way. The step is responsible to convert theinternal representation of a keyword into a visible and intuitiverepresentation for the user in the GUI. This may be for example todisplay a keyword in a different color, font or style. Also, in anotherembodiment, a keyword could be displayed along with some context. Thisis part of another step called keyword context selection [210-212].

Content Analyzer Section (FIG. 2 [208]):

A jargon file contains several jargons/important words depending on theend-user business area or industry (e.g. in insurance industry “policylapse”, in banking industry “accounts termination”, in govt. industry“public complaint notice” etc.). A user may have several other jargonfiles such as personal, departmental, hobbies, sports, etc. A user willbe able to create and update his/her jargon files and important industrywords/jargons within those files. Pre-defined jargon files (or jargondictionary) can be provided at a central organization-level or at anindividual user's level and can be continuously updated using the datafiles.

In the Content Analyzer process, a right jargon file is selected as aninput for the Keywords identification box, to increase the accuracy ofthe summary. A probabilistic approach that correlates all jargon filesand computed word scores is used to select the right jargon file. Alsosince a jargon file will also define the type of content that a messagehas, different rules can be applied to the message depending on the typeof jargon files it is related with. This methodology becomes a part ofthe adaptive learning process [107].

Sentences Analysis Box (FIG. 2 [209]):

After the keywords are identified, the most relevant sentences areexamined. All the sentences will be scored according to a particularalgorithm. The algorithm scores a sentence based on how many keywordsare included in the sentence. At the end of this step, every sentencewill be attributed a score.

Keyword Context Selection Box (FIG. 2 [210]):

The keywords might be rendered as a suite of words. This approachdoesn't offer enough valuable information about the context. Therefore,in one embodiment, some context should always be displayed with akeyword. In order to display it, it has first to be selected. Such anembodiment selects the context as simple as the two to three wordsbefore and after a keyword or it could be more complicated and includethe text structure (e.g., punctuation, etc.) in its decision to take aword as part of the context. As the same keyword may appear many timesin the document, data issued from the Sentence Analysis Box will be usedto define summary in a more accurate manner.

Keywords Context Display Box (FIG. 2 [211], [212]):

This step of the procedure [212] will render the keywords and theircontext in the GUI. Keywords may be highlighted or may appear in adifferent style whereas the context will be displayed as normal text[211].

Sentence Selection Box (FIG. 2 [213]):

This step performs the selection of the key sentences. After thesentences are scored, the most relevant ones are selected. This can beas simple as sorting all the sentences by score and selecting those thatare at the top of the list (if the list is sorted with the most relevantsentences on top)

Key Sentences Display Box (FIG. 2 [214]):

Several key sentences are selected and are internally tagged as beingpart of the summary. This step transforms this internal representationof the summary in a graphical one. This can be as simple as displayingthe sentences and the keywords in the sentences in a different color butcould also involve an intelligent organization of the sentences.

Links Extraction Box (FIG. 2 [215]):

After the key words are scored, a special “type” of data will needparticular attention. This “type” is the link type. Links will oftenneed to be included in the summary. However, a link's name is often notexplicit enough to give the user all the information he/she needs aboutthat link (e.g., if the link is displayed in its IP address form, nointuitive information is provided). A link requires additionalprocessing of its tag to see if the text included in the <a> tags isexplicit enough or contains any keywords that might need to bedisplayed.

Link Context Selection and Display (FIG. 2 [216], [217]):

The context selection around a link can be as simple as parsing the textin the <a> tags or as complicated as searching for a word such as“link”, “site”, “URL” that refers to that link, then gatheringinformation from that part of the text. Those words, if they exist, willbe displayed as key words [217].

3) Prioritization Module (FIG. 1 [108], FIG. 4-18)

3.1) Prioritization System (FIG. 1[108]):

The prioritization module comprises of: Parsed Statistics Repository[104], Prioritization Engine [105], and a portion of Adaptive Learning[107].

When a new message arrives in a queue, the message parsing processstarts to purify and structure its content and stores its metadata intoa database [104]. The metadata is used as parameters to each of theindependent filters which evaluate the overall priority of a message.

The prioritization engine [105] includes two distinct components: a listof the messages [406] and a processor unit [407]. The list of messagescontains the messages ordered by overall priority and is updatedwhenever a new message arrives, a message is deleted or some eventoccurs. The processor unit contains and manages the different filters[403], taking the parsed statistics message [401] as input and computingthe priority value as an output [404].

Once the priority value of a certain email is calculated, the message isinserted in the list [406] and updates are performed on the statisticsto be used for further analysis [107].

3.2) Prioritization Process (FIG. 4)

The prioritization process takes place after a message has decoupledfrom its source and a decomposition of its parts and attributes has beenmade [103]. An email message represented by a unique identifier [401] isgiven as an input to the prioritization engine. This input comprises ofvarious statistics from the repository [104] where the message has beenstored and structured. Statistics retrieved by the controller [402] arethen input to a set of independent filters [403] that will computepriority values based on different aspects of the message. The filtersreturn different values that the system compute through a function (FIG.4[404], FIG. 6), calculating a single value as a result (using aweighted average in the current implementation). This result is theoverall priority for the message which can then be classified in themessages list [5]. Once the process of prioritization finishes, theprioritization engine sends an update event [6] to the system in orderto refresh the GUI [106] or execute any other related action.

3.3) Prioritization Algorithm (FIG. 5)

The initial step of prioritization evaluation begins with a broadcategorization of the message [511]. The message is categorized intoalerts, business, confirmation, published information (for example:newsletter), meeting or task request/acceptance, personal and unwantedsolicitation. Categorization relies on contextual analysis of themessage via keyword mapping, message format, layout, and schema. TheSecurity Context (Source, Destination, Intermediate Paths, andSensitivity), Inherent Metadata (Priority Classification, Category, andConversation Thread) and Time Factors (Sent, Received, TransactionalQualifications, and Acknowledgement) data points are stored in a datarepository [512 a] for an indefinite period. This stored data is thenevaluated for its situational priority value [516] and inherent priorityvalue [517]. The combination of the evaluation reveals its overallpriority which can be fed to any destination client that wishes to knowthe value.

The evaluation process, however, is not a one time event. The priorityof a message will be evaluated over time. The system will listen forevents; these events are caused by either user or system actions [515].The situational [513] and/or inherent [514] events will be monitored andgiven an event occurrence the event attributes will be cataloged andstored [512 b]. This will then further engage the system inre-evaluation of existing message priorities [516, 517], and dynamicallyupdate the overall priority [518].

Illustrative examples of Inherent events are:

a) The addition of an important keyword to the system by the messagerecipient; messages containing the keyword will have a higher priority.

b) The message recipient has never updated a default filter of corporatepolicies, but he/she is continuously updating other filters. The weightof the filter which has not been updated will be reduced to increase theaccuracy of the other filters.

Examples of Situational events are:

a) A meeting time is approaching; messages regarding this meeting havetheir priority increased.

b) The list has not been updated for a long time; the system refreshesthe list and reduces the priority given to old emails

3.4) Conceptual Embodiments of Message Prioritization

3.4.1) Situational/Inherent Prioritization Model

Situational priority [516] is the interest given to a message within aspecific context is related to a single message and varies with the time(a message regarding a meeting is important before the meeting but hasmuch less interest once the date is passed). Since recipient knowledge,beliefs, motivations, etc can impact the priority of a message the morewe know about a recipient and the moment the message is being reviewed,the better we are able to assess message situational priority. The morewe know about the task or work situation surrounding sending of amessage, the better we will be able to assess situational priority.

Inherent priority [517] is the interest given to a message in comparisonto the other messages and is based on the content (a casual message froma coworker leaving for lunch is always less important than a messagefrom a new client regarding a purchase order). The more we know aboutvalue added attributes of a message such as what is the source and whatis destination, topical matter, gist, etc. the better we are able toasses the Inherent priority.

The ability to add or modify dimensions adaptively that pertains toeither situation and/or inherent attributes in turn enhances the abilityto asses the overall priority.

The overall priority of a message can be modeled by a“Situational/Inherent” priority architecture. Any electronic message(voice mail, email, alert notification, meeting request, corporatepublishing, confirmation notice, unwanted solicitation, etc) can beconsidered to have both a Situational and Inherent priority to itsrecipient. The overall priority is a function combining Situational andInherent priorities to provide a single value.Message priority=function (Situational, Inherent)

The Situational priority has dimensions that are mostly dynamicallydetermined and dependent upon an event or series of events. These eventsare traced and mapped to bring forth a multi-dimensional function thatequates to the situational priority of the message.

The Inherent priority has dimensions that are mostly staticallydetermined and dependent on the information context. These informationaldimensions can include one or more of the subject matter, sender(s),recipient(s), message content, embedded messages, and other embeddedinformational characteristics.

Thus, it can be stated Situational and Inherent priorities aremultidimensional equations that when coupled together reveal the overallpriority of a message.Message priority=function [Situational f(event dimensions), Inherentf(content dimensions)]

This usage coincides with our everyday intuition about message priority.Messages whether electronic, textual, or verbal include situation andinherent facets. A message that relays to recipient that ‘the weddingceremony begins promptly at noon’ has event dimensions as well ascontent dimensions. The event dimension for this example is that themessage arrived, and when the actions in the message will take place. Ifthe event will occur in the future it will most likely have a higherSituational Priority. If the event has occurred in the past then it willmost likely have a lower Situational Priority. One of the Inherentdimensions of this message is who the sender is. If the sender of thismessage is known and appreciated by the recipient then the InherentPriority will be high. Thus the function combining Situational andInherent will equate to the actual message priority more accurately thana static evaluation of the message.

3.4.2) Relevance/Importance Prioritization Model

The dimensions for evaluating priority of a message can be furtherdecomposed into Relevance and Importance measurements. Relevance isrelated to the variability that exists on a dimension or filter, whereasImportance is related to the co-variability that exists between twodimensions or filters.Dimension Value (event or content)=function (Relevance, Importance)

Dimensional Aspect Modeled by Intuitive Aspect MathematicalRepresentation

Relevance Variability The more unusual or uncommon (relative to somecontext) a message, the more relevant it is Variance or standarddeviation (though usually rescaled)

Importance Co-Variability The more similar a message is to someyardstick, the more important it is Weight parameter

Illustrative examples of certain embodiments affecting Relevance are:

a) Whether information is missing or unknown (either within the messagebody or message header)

b) The amount of knowledge a message recipient has about the incomingmessage

c) Recent message situation context (e.g., “Do I always get messages ofthis type?” “Do I always get messages of this priority (as given by thesender)”? “Is this message one in a series or a stand-alone”?)

Illustrative examples of certain embodiments affecting Importance are:

a) Similarity between keywords and words in the message, or betweenkeywords and words in the message Title or Subject line

b) Similarity between topics in the message and issues of previousmessages

c) Inherent (i.e., static) salience of context surrounding the message(like sender information)

We can summarize the above portion as follows:Message priority=function (Situational, Inherent)Message priority=function [Situational f(event dimensions), Inherentf(content dimensions)]Situational f(event dimensions)=function (Relevance, Importance)Inherent f(content dimensions)=function (Relevance, Importance)

Therefore:Message priority=function [Situational f(event dimensions f(Relevance,Importance)), Inherent f(content dimensions(Relevance, Importance))]

3.5) Implementation of Prioritization System (FIG. 601,602,603)

A filter can be attached to each of the dimensions measured to definethe value of both Situational [516] and Inherent [517] priority. Thesefilters aim to analyze their respective dimension and return a value.The Overall Priority [518] is computed based on these values.

In one embodiment the priority can be computed based on the result ofmultiple, independent and adaptive filters. “Independent” means that newcompatible filters, analyzing other parts or attributes of the message,can be dynamically added or removed from the system without affectingthe system in any way. “Adaptive” means that these different filters areable to automatically modify their behavior based on the user'spreferences, the user's general behavior and the results from otherfilters.

Filters can include one or more of three factors Weight, Result, andEfficiency. W is an importance weight given to the filter by the system,R is the Result of the application of the filter to a message, and E isthe Efficiency of that filter. In one embodiment, a weighted average ofthese factors is then taken using (W×E as a weight).

The terms Weight, Result, and Efficiency are further described asfollows:

Weight is the long term effectiveness of the filter in priorityanalysis. The weight adaptively changes. It is based on supervisedlearning from the message recipient as well as historically collecteddata regarding the effectiveness of this filter in minimizing thedeviance between expected priority and actual priority. The historicallycollected data is analyzed statistically and from an ArtificialIntelligence vantage point to reassess the weight value (unsupervisedlearning). The weight is common to a set of messages.

Result is the actual score given to each message by the dimensionanalysis and is specific to the message. Result is the concreteexpression of the priority computed for this dimension. RESULT answersthe question “how important is the email?” based on the filter findings.

Efficiency value expresses uncertainty regarding the Result. The morethe result is judged as accurate, the higher is the efficiency.Efficiency is calculated based on the inputs given to the filter and canthen be affected by rules across the different filters, based on thecontextual analysis. Situation will impact the applicability/efficiencyof a filter. Efficiency is specific to the message processed. EFFICIENCYanswers the question “how accurate is my result?” given the inputparameters. If the filter is not able to answer this questionaccurately, its efficiency is reduced and the system will favor theother filters.Filter Values (Weight, Result, Efficiency)=f(Message)Situational f(event dimensions)=f(Weight, Result, Efficiency)Inherent f(content dimensions)=f(Weight, Result, Efficiency)

This model is simply a specialized version of the more generalRelevance/Importance prioritization model; where the combination of Wand R is giving the Importance (independent from the context) while theefficiency will model the Relevance (taking care of the context).Importance=f(Weight, Result)Relevance=f(Efficiency)

In one embodiment, filter analysis is performed in the three steps shownin the FIG. 6. This is a representation of the implementationmethodology to calculate the Situation Priority [516] and InherentPriority [517] (Filters involved in this process are respectivelyreferred to as Situational Filters and Inherent Filters).

Data Extraction [601]: Each of the filters called by the processor willlook at the information within and surrounding an email, to analyze aparticular dimension. Filters will return two values: Result andEfficiency.

Rules Application [602]: if two filters are linked and if the result ofone filter affects the result of the other filter, rules are applied tomodify the Efficiency of the filters.

Priority Computing [603]: results of each filter are computed to obtainthe final priority value. The calculation involves the Result, theEfficiency as well as the Weight given for the filters. The priorityvalue returned by the calculation is a decimal value between 0 and 1which could be displayed as a ranking score to the user.

The interpretation of the Relevance/Importance prioritization modeldiffers slightly when calculating Situational and Inherentprioritization scores as described below. Interpretations of Weight,Result and Efficiency parameters for both Situational and Inherentpriorities are detailed below:

3.5.1) Situational Evaluation [516]:

The messages arrive in a queue with context indicators and a prioritygiven by the sender. These indicators are based on the sender'sknowledge, perspective of the known value in the underlying eventdetails, and contextual details. Simply stated the priority of themessage is from the sender's perspective.

Some senders may not indicate a relevant priority value and so it can beassumed to have some default priority. The assumed priority has beentypically modeled along the lines of ‘Last In First Out’ discipline.Furthermore, the context of the message can vary greatly; however, at aminimum a set of the context is decipherable. This set will be along thelines of sender(s), recipient(s), and intermediate paths. Further, it ismost likely the message will also have some sort of topical indicator orsubject description.

The failure in using these elementary sets is that an initial prioritycan be gathered, however, a situational priority will be difficult topredict without further qualitative analysis. The question that will beraised is, ‘What is the priority of message 1 with respect to message 2with similar context?’ To answer this question simplified time dependentpriority disciplines are used. These disciplines are LIFO (Last In FirstOut) and FIFO (First In First Out).

Using a qualitative analysis in which the claimed priority coupled withthe context is categorized will result in varying initial situationaldependent priority paths. Assuming a steady flow of queued messages, anindividual message's graphical representation is illustrated in FIGS.10-15, which depict Lifecycle Priority-Time curves for variouscategories of messages

The following are the time curves (or Life Cycles) identified fordifferent type of messages:

LIFO (Last In First Out)—FIG. 10

The effect on priority is that if it's not processed before the nextmessage is queued, the current will lose priority to newly arrivedmessage.

FIFO (First In First Out)—FIG. 11

The effect on priority is that if it's not on top of the queue it willgain priority as older messages are processed. All new arrivals will beof lower priority.

Confirmation—FIG. 12

The priority will be relatively high for a short period of time, afterwhich the usefulness of processing the message will be steady and thenfinally decreasing. An example would be shipping confirmation. Arecipient would initially value the confirmation message. The valuewould then decrease slowly for a moment, before falling down once theshipment arrives.

Personal—FIG. 13

The priority will be relatively high for a period of time, after whichthe usefulness of processing the message will be less as other businessmessages will most likely have greater priority, thus significantlylowering the value of the initial personal message.

Meeting Request—FIG. 14

The priority will be increasing till the time of meeting at which thepriority would remain high and leveled. However, after the meeting thevalue would quickly decrease.

Unwanted Solicitation—FIG. 15

The priority will be relatively low for a short period of time, afterwhich the usefulness of processing the message will be steady but oflimited priority and most likely not of any value. Thus compared toother messages in the system the priority would decrease.

Alerts—FIG. 16

The priority will be relatively high for a short period of time, afterwhich the usefulness of processing the message will have gone down dueto window of opportunity closing. An example may be critical news on astock, which would have investors taking immediate action.

Published Information—FIG. 17

The priority will be relatively high for a short period of time, afterwhich the usefulness of processing the message will be steady but oflimited immediate priority and then finally decreasing. An example wouldbe a monthly newsletter. A recipient would initially value the newsletter for some initial content. However, once read, the usefulnesswould be limited.

Business—FIG. 18

The priority will be relatively high for a period of time, after whichthe usefulness of processing the message will be less as other businessmessages will most likely have additional information or significantlylower the value of the initial business message.

This initial situational dependent priority path is the baselinepriority the message will take assuming some initial analysis. Given newevents and event analysis the effects will be reflected in situationalpriority.

The Situational application of Relevance/Importance includes acombination of the previous time curves which will define the overalllife cycle of the email. Each of the curves has a specific shape andmeaning (FIGS. 10-18). At the same time all messages have a continuouslydecreasing interest as the user wants to be up to date. Situationalpriority is calculated by a set of mathematical equations (time curves),software “modes” (incoming meeting, lunch break) and additional eventsinfluencing the result.

The situational factor is continuously reevaluated in the applicationand a situational message re-qualification can be started by a timeevent (timer) or a user event (lunch break, waiting for an email fromthis person, follow up . . . ), known as Situational Events.

Situational Filters will be responding to a Situational Event bycomputing a new value for the situational priority. Situational Filtersare also time dependent and implement the notion of time curvesdiscussed previously.

For each of the Situational filters, the implementation can be achievedas follows:

Result is the expression of an equation and is time dependent: R=f(t).Depending on the type of curve implemented in the filter, this could bea polynomial, logarithmic or discontinuous equation, presenting arelative priority of the email through time.

Weight is the importance given to a curve or a type of curve (lifecycle, event . . . ) in comparison to the others.

Efficiency is the validity of the filter at a time and is expressed by aconstant C representing the certitude of the model (how much the timecurve selected applies to the current email) and a function g(t)defining when the filter should be applied. E=g(t)×C

To illustrate the above implementation, an example is shown in FIG. 10.In this example, a time curve is given for the life cycle of the message[719], this can be for instance the standard curve for all the businessmessages. This time curve is the Result of the lifecycle filter and theEfficiency is set to 1 all the time (which does not affect the curve).

The message contains information about an important meeting; the meetingimportance is given by the curve Meeting Result [702] and is constant.However in the current context, the meeting will be important around aspecific time (6 pm-8 pm on the X-axis). The Efficiency [703] is varyingaccordingly, giving more importance to the filter when the time comes. Acurve not represented here combines the Meeting Result and the MeetingEfficiency to obtain the overall life cycle of the meeting.

Priority [704] is the result of the filter combinations, (business andmeeting lifecycle), expressing the situational priority of this emailthrough time.

3.5.2) Inherent Evaluation [517]

The inherent evaluation is based on rigorous content analysis of themessage. The analysis of the message is mapped to a set of filters.These filters independently address the value associated for aparticular data element in the message. The filter may applyquantitative analysis such as the number of senders that were intendedto receive the message, or the number of intermediate paths the messageencountered before being directed to the recipient. The type ofqualitative analysis it will conduct is the level of value eachintermediate path brought to the message context or the importance levelin priority ranking for the recipients. In one embodiment a hierarchy ofInherent filters work together to analyzing different aspects of themessage (FIG. 9).

Identification of the entities involved: the system is looking at theexistence of the contacts in the user's profile database to see if aspecial rank of importance is associated (high, medium, low or spam).More priority is given to the sender with the highest rank. Prioritywill also be influenced by the additional recipients of the message.

Identification of the message content: the system is looking forspecific keywords in the subject, the body and embedded messages. Morekeywords in a message increase the probability to accurately identifythe content, the type of keyword (dictionary) being selected to arriveat the relevance of the message (priority).

Message attributes: the system is looking for the information given bythe existing attributes of the message. This includes the Reply orForward status, the importance attribute, the delivery receipt, the datethe message was sent.

Multiple other criteria: the system is analyzing other interestinginformation like changes in the format (bold/color sentences), the typeof message, the existence of a signature.

Inherent factors are computed once, when the message arrives. Messagescan be reevaluated by a system event (software update) or a user event(priority rule added), known as Inherent Events.

As for the Situational part, Inherent Filters will be responding toInherent Events by computing a new value for the situational prioritybased on the three factors Result, Efficiency and Weight, implemented asfollows:

Result is the calculation of the importance of the message based on aseries of static rules, defining how important the message is in thedimension analyzed. The calculation is mainly based on the messagesattributes and content along with personal and organizational rules andpolicies (as the corporate hierarchy for instance).

Weight is the importance given to one dimension in comparison toanother. The identification of the message sender is more important thanthe date email is sent.

Efficiency is the estimated accuracy and validity of the result based onthe inputs available in the dimensions. Efficiency is affected by:

-   -   A lack of information in the dimension during the analysis    -   A logic interaction between different filters affecting the        priority    -   Unusual results in comparison to historical data

To illustrate the above implementation, an example is shown in FIG. 8.In the example, the Priority Value is calculated using three differenttypes of filters.

Certain embodiments are disclosed in Table 1 to disclose various typesof Inherent filters.

3.6) Illustrative Examples of Certain Embodiments: Relevance &Importance Priority Evaluation

a) Relevance and Importance can trade-off against one another; animportant message may have low Priority if its Relevance is low;conversely, a relevant message may have low Priority if its Importanceis low

b) Because Relevance is driven by Situation Context, the very samemessage can vary in Relevance to the same recipient from Time1 to Time2

c) Because Relevance is driven by Situation Context, the very samemessage can differ in Relevance to different recipients

d) Example: A recipient receives a message from his boss. The boss isinherently important, and he has marked the message as “high” priority.But the boss always sends “high” priority messages, so the Relevance ofthis message (at least as determined solely by the priority marking islow or even 0). Therefore, the message priority is lower than it wouldotherwise be.

e) Same example as in 1, but the boss “knows” that he always sends“high” priority message, and he intuitively suspects that this lack ofvariability will diminish the message's relevance in the recipients'eyes (or he has noticed it because of lack of response on therecipient's part). He therefore creates a new category (“urgent”) tocreate variability in the recipient's eyes, thereby driving Relevanceup.

f) Sometimes it is the Status Quo which is used as the basis againstwhich Relevance is partially determined. By this reckoning, messages onnew subjects (relative to the Status Quo) will be more relevant that amessage that is one of several in the same subject thread.

g) The sender of a message is unknown. It either stays as unknown, orperhaps as the result of logic, is guessed at based on an attribute suchas address. The credibility of this “Result” is therefore in question,and therefore the impact of the “sender” identity on message prioritymust be diminished. In this case, the uncertainty surrounding anattribute's value gets “reverse scored”, in that its greater variabilitylessens, not increases, its Relevance.

h) Some Examples:

-   -   User X always gets short messages (either in general or from        sender Y), but now gets a long one (Relevance increases)    -   User X always gets English messages, but now gets one in French        (Relevance increases)    -   User X is currently working on Tasks Y and Z within his        organization. Message A, either subject header or summarization        analysis, pertains to topic Y (high co variability), so it is        important to User X.    -   Same example as before, but User X notices that the subject        header (and perhaps date and message size) are exactly the same        (i.e., no variability) as a previous message, therefore        Relevance is 0 and message priority is 0 even though Importance        is still measured as high

i) The sender of a message is the “boss”, and so a strong, staticcomponent to message Importance exists. This static component can beaugmented by filters that assess the similarity of the message summaryto topics of interest to the user, or other co-variability basedfilters.

4) GUI Module (FIG. 1 [109] FIG. 19-24)

The GUI module [109] comprises of a Graphical User Interface [106] and aportion of Adaptive Learning [107]. In one embodiment, the GUI can be apop window with customizable views i.e. full view, medium-view,mini-view which can stay open (like Instant Messaging pop-up windows)along with other application windows simultaneously open on the user'sdesktop machine. In another embodiment the GUI can be an independentemail messaging application. Another embodiment includes applicationswhere the system can integrate with any other independent email clientapplications or internet email applications with or without that emailclient application being launched or opened simultaneously. Theapplications of the invention may also include whether the full orsmaller version of the system can be implemented on hand-held devices orcell phone. Other application may include a customizable functionalityof text to voice conversion of the summarized messages [2104, 2105] fora busy user to listen to the executive summary of his/her electronicmessages (while the user is unable to look at the screen such as drivingor busy in the other work, or using a small screen device).

4.1) GUI System (FIG. 1[1091], FIG. 19)

The graphical user interface (GUI) displays the information that mayassist the user to improve his/her message reading, message processing,work planning, productivity and most importantly the quality of overallemail interaction experience. To this aim in one of the embodiment,several visual elements inform the user of the overall prioritycategorization [2027, 2202]; its relative priority ranking [2025, 2201]within a particular priority class; executive summary of the individualmessage [2209]; and key words [2031]. The message summary frame [2104,2107] can be considered as a user's work bench where the action items(email messages) are presented in order of the user-defined priority;quick decisions can be taken and the individual items can be removedfrom the view [2004, 2030, 2206] when the actions items are completed(electronic messages processed or filed for later processing).

In another embodiment GUI displays several fast-action buttons [2032,2211-13, 2310-12] that allow the user to quickly take some actions onthe message currently displayed.

Other embodiments of the GUI contain mechanisms to learn and improve itsmessage prioritization classification based on the user feedback.Several regions of the GUI are intended to collect information from theuser.

At a message summary frame level (FIG. 21), the user can providefeedback to the application by selecting a whole message or aword/textual element included in it and assigning to it a classification(e.g., select the word “insurance” in a message subject or summary andgive it a high priority). At a complete message level, the user canprovide feedback to the application by selecting the whole message or aword/textual element included in it. As illustrated in FIG. 1, thesefeedbacks are used by the prioritization and, to some extent, themessage summarization processes.

In another embodiment a GUI also provides several ways to display thelist of messages using multiple criteria that might be combined. Thesecriteria may include one or more of the following: overall computedpriority, associated user notes, and conversation thread along with theconventional methods based reception date, sender, and type ofattachments.

4.2) Process and Implementation of GUI System (FIG. 19, FIG. 20-22, 22a)

As depicted in FIG. 19 (and FIG. 1), the process of displaying,processing and learning from electronic messages comprises severalsteps. A monitor [102] observes a message queue [101]. Arriving messagesare parsed [103] and statistics are extracted [104]. A prioritizationalgorithm [105] computes the priority of the messages, and then the GUI[106] is responsible for displaying these messages. As the end-user actson the GUI, user's behavior is monitored and used to feed back [107] theoverall system.

The message viewing and processing GUI [106] includes of severalwindows. The main GUI as shown in FIG. 20 is the start window. At thelaunch, this window appears and presents a list of messages [2023],based on the default sorting option. This main window is furtherdetailed in FIG. 21 and FIG. 22. A complete description of the GUIprocess and implementation is disclosed below:

4.2.1) Main Toolbar Area [2102]:

The main toolbar is placed on the top part of the main application frame[2101]. It is made of the main action buttons related to the messages'management. These buttons are:

Draft (button) [2001]: It opens a separate window that contains a newblank electronic message in an electronic message client application;

Reply (button) [2002]: It opens a separate reply window of an electronicmessage client application;

Forward (button) [2003]: It opens a separate forward window of anelectronic message client application;

Clear (button) [2004]: It removes the select (highlighted) summarizedmessage from the main form and marks it as done (task finished or taskcleared) for future accesses;

Sort (button list) [2007]: It displays a drop-down menu of sortingoptions [2024]:

Date [2024, first option]: It changes the summarized messages displayedin the main window. The messages appear sorted by date and time (and notin the order of their prioritization score).

From [2024, second option]: It changes the summarized messages displayedin the main window. The messages appear sorted by sender name (and notin the order of their prioritization score).

Priority [2024, third option]: It changes the summarized messagesdisplayed in the main window. The messages appear sorted by priorityi.e., high, medium, low, or spam. This is a default setting of theapplication.

Attachment [2024, fourth option]: It changes the summarized messagesdisplayed in the main window. The messages appear sorted by type (thenname) of attachments (and not in the order of their prioritizationscore).

User-Note [2024, fifth option]: It changes the summarized messagesdisplayed in the main window. The messages appear sorted by user-notee.g., does the message has a user's written note or not? (and not in theorder of their prioritization score).

Search [2011, text field area and button]: It changes the summarizedmessages displayed in the main window. The text entered in the searchtext field area defines what messages will appear (e.g., if the userenters “insurance”, then all the messages that contain this word will bedisplayed in a specific order);

Calendar (button) [2034]: It displays the calendar view of an electronicmessage client application;

Task List (button) [2006]: It displays the task list view of anelectronic message client application;

Folder Filing Rules: The system files messages automatically based onpre-set rules and their priority levels. User can create rules or canuse rules from the existing art email client. In one embodiment, junkemail will be redirected to the current embodiment's ‘junk’ folder orthe junk folder of the existing art email client.

View (button list) [2008]: It displays a list of drop-down menu ofseparate windows (not shown) which can display/hide as described below:

Folders: It opens/closes a contextual pop-up window (not shown) thatcontains a tree view explorer of the user's message folders from anelectronic message client application;

Message Priority: It opens/closes a pop-window (not shown) that containscheck box list of all the message priorities (High, Medium, Low, andSpam) which are permitted to be shown in the GUI. By default all theboxes are checked i.e. message summary frame [2107] will show all themessages belonging to all the prioritization categories (in the selecteddate range [2021] to [2022]). If a busy user would like to view only theHigh priority messages, he can do so by only checking-on to the highpriority box (and checking-of the remaining three boxes).

Keyword Priority: It opens/closes a contextual pop-up window (not shown)that contains an editable table of the keywords with their associatedlevel of priority (categorized as high, medium, low, spam). Example,sender's email address may be pulled from the repository as one of thekeywords.

Jargons Dictionary: It opens/closes a contextual pop-up window (notshown) that contains an editable menu of all the Jargon Files, andimportant words/jargons associated with each of the jargon files (e.g.work, business, personal, education, sports, hobby).

Preferences: It opens a pop-up window (not shown) that contains detailedcustomizable system administrator type options of the application, whichwill be used only rarely. This include one or more of the following:Ability of update/share/store prioritization database at a local orcentral level, the time interval to check for the new incoming messages,customize the buttons and their location preferences, customize thecolor coding system for representing high, medium, low or spamcategories, and the overall prioritization score classification ranges.

Help (button) [2009]: It opens a separate window that contains the helpinformation;

Exit (button) [2010]: It exits the application and saves thepreferences.

4.2.2) Side Frame [2103]:

This area [2103] shows some icons utilized to either change the priorityof a message or of a key word. The area is made of the followingpriority buttons:

High [2013, also refer 2305] (button): It changes the priority of eithera key word or a whole electronic message to high or keeps it unchangedif it already has a high priority;

Medium [2014, also refer 2306] (button): It changes the priority ofeither a key word or a whole electronic message to medium or keeps itunchanged if it already has a medium priority;

Low [2015, also refer 2307] (button): It changes the priority of eithera key word or a whole electronic message to low or keeps it unchanged ifit already has a low priority;

Spam [2016, also refer 2308] (button): It changes the priority of eithera key word or a whole electronic message to null or keeps it unchangedif it already has a null priority.

Progression Icon [2017]: This icon becomes animated when one or more newincoming messages are received and being processed by the prioritizationmodule to let a user know that the message(s) will soon be updated inthe GUI. A user setting can also be permitted to run the refreshoperation of the GUI after every certain time interval or on the clickof the Progression Icon button.

4.2.3) Top Part [2106] of the Message Summary Frame [2104]:

This part [2106] indicates to the user what is the date range for themessage currently being displayed

Today Date [2018]: It displays the current date (e.g., Thursday, May 20,2004).

From-To: It displays the date range of the messages currently beingdisplayed. This area includes the following elements:

-   -   From Text: It displays the text “From”;    -   From Text Field Area [2021]: The date entered in the From Text        Field Area defines what messages will appear (e.g., if the user        enters a past date, then all the messages received between this        date and the date in the field “to” will be displayed in the        order currently defined by the sort button [2019]). It opens a        smaller pop-up window displaying a month calendar to select the        date. When the end-user has clicked on a date, the pop-up window        disappears;    -   To Text: It displays the text “To”;    -   To Text Field Area [2022]: The date entered in the To Text Field        Area defines what messages will appear (e.g., if the user enters        the current date, then all the messages received between the        “from” date and today will be displayed in a specific order        currently defined by the sort button [2019]). It opens a pop-up        window displaying a month calendar to select the date. When the        end-user has clicked on a date, the pop-up window disappears;

Sort Order Arrow [2019]: It depicts the direction of the sort (e.g.,‘up’ arrow it is ascending order and ‘down’ arrow if it is descendingorder).

4.2.4) Main Part [2107] of the Message Summary Frame [2104]:

This main part [2107] presents a list of Summarized Messages arranged ina prioritization order. It can also present the summarized messages listresulted from the search/sort operation(s).

Following is the General Behavior:

This area [2107] can be considered as a user's work bench in which theopen action items (electronic messages) are presented in order of theirpriority (prioritization is customized to user work behavior). The usercan view the entire message by double-clicking on the summarized-viewmessage.

The message list is updated whenever one or more new incoming messagesare received and processed by the prioritization system, or after asearch/sort operation

Once a particular action item is take care by the user (either byreplying to the message [2002], forwarding [2003], just reading forinformation purposes, or completing desired actions based on the email,or filing in the folders [2008], or added in calendar [2034] or tasklist [2006] or assigned as a spam [2016] or changing/assigning priorityclassification [2013-2016], etc.) the work bench [2104] needs to becleared up [2004, 2030, 2206] so that the remaining items can be now betaken care by the user.

A user can also set the view [2008] settings for only one, more thanone, or any combination of high, medium, low and spam category messages.This embodiment is very useful for a busy user who has set up thisapplication to show him only the high and medium priority messages (fromthe first day of his use till today). For example, he has reserved oneday in every month where he has enough time to review his remainingemail messages (falling in low and/or spam category). The user can dothat by simply selecting the suitable date range [2021, 2022] andpriority classification [2008] (checking-on low and spam boxes, andchecking-off high and medium priority boxes). The best thing is thateven the remaining messages are arranged in the order of their priorityscores along with their summarized views to further improve user'sproductivity.

At the end of the day, when the user has no email messages left to viewin the work bench (assuming user's setting are set up, he/she will knowthat all the emails are taken care and nothing slipped his/her attention(of course, the user also has to look at his calendar, task list andother planned items).

The first (top) message is highlighted and selected by default when theapplication is launched;

As the user scrolls down or selects another message (by clicking on it),the new one becomes highlighted while the previous one restores itsdefault layout except its Subject Line which loses its bold attribute.

4.2.5) Bottom Part [2108] of the Message Summary Frame [2104]:

This part [2108] provides quantitative data regarding the number ofmessages in the current view which are yet to be processed or cleared bya user:

Remaining Items [2020]: It is the number of messages that remain in thecurrent view (i.e., how many messages need to be processed).

4.2.6) Message Summary [2023, 2105, FIG. 22, FIG. 23, 23 a]:

A summarized message is made of different components listed below:

Priority Categorization Icon [2027, 2202]: This symbol visuallyindicates the overall priority categorization status of a message ascalculated by the prioritization module (e.g., whether the message is ahigh, medium, or low priority or whether it is a spam). These icons mayresemble the respective priority buttons [2013 to 2016, 2305 to 2308].The objective of this presentation is to let a user know of the priorityclassification of a message without opening the complete message;

Priority Score Ranking [2025, 2201]: It visually indicates the overallpriority score (from 0.00 to 1.00) of a message as represented on ascale. In another embodiment the ranking bar changes its color dependingupon the prioritization categorization of a message (high, medium, lowor spam). The objective of this presentation is to let a user know ofthe relative ranking of a message within a specific priorityclassification. For example in FIG. 20 there are three high prioritymessages (at the top), with the help of the priority score bar the userwill know which one is the highest priority message and how the othertwo messages rank as compared to the former.

Message Subject [2203]: It is the subject field of the electronicmessage;

Date/Time [2026, 2208]: Depending on the sort options, this fieldrepresents either the time of the day or both the date and time at whicha message was received (e.g., if only today's messages are displayed asdepicted in FIG. 20 [2012] then only the time is showed, else both thetime and date appear instead of just the time);

Attachment Icons [2028, 2204]: These icons are associated to each of theattachments that the electronic message includes, up to a maximum offive attachments. If the message contains six or more attachments, thenonly the five first are depicted in this area along with a symboldirecting a user to open the complete message to view all theattachments. The icons used to depict the attachments mimic those of theoperating system's explorer; by double-clicking clicking on these iconsthe respective file attachments can open up.

User-Note (button) [2029, 2210, 2309]: This feature allows a user towrite quick written notes and clip them to the individual messages ashe/she is going through the list of messages or any individual message.In one embodiment by clicking on this icon it opens up a smaller pop-upnotepad window (not shown). When any notes are added (or edited) andsaved the User-Note icon becomes highlighted. This visually depicts tothe user which messages out of whole list have associated user-notes(annotations, action items) so that he can prioritize his work planaccordingly. In another embodiment the user can sort the messages basedon the attached user-notes.

Clear (button) [2004, 2030, 2206]: By clicking on this button it removesthe selected message (or list of messages) from the main form [2104]view and marks it as ‘cleared’ for future access.

From [2033, 2207]: It displays the name and/or electronic address of theelectronic message's sender. If the user is not the direct recipient ofthe message, then this information is followed by the mention of ‘cc’ or‘bcc’ between brackets [for example e.g. andrew@abc.com (cc)].

Summary Area [2209]: It displays a summarized version of the messagebody includes of:

Summary [2209]: It is a summary of the electronic message body (fordetails refer to 214, 212, 405, and 406]. Double-clicking (orRight-click contextual menu selection) on the summarized-view will openthe entire message in a new window in the current embodiment or in theexisting art email client systems.

List of Links: It is a list of the links extracted from the message andtheir associated commentary (for details refer to [217]).

Scroll Bar [2033]: If the summary information is too long to becompletely displayed in the summary area, then it allows the navigationinside this summary area.

4.2.7) Fast-Action Buttons [2032, 2211-13, 2310-12]:

These buttons allow the user to perform fast actions on the messages. Inone embodiment these buttons can be useful for busy managers orsupervisors who prefer that the sender of the message be directed totake an action based on the electronic message sent by him. By clickingon the respective buttons a pre-defined message response iselectronically sent to sender of the message along with any schedulingpreference of the user. The draft of the sent message can be customizedto suit the work habits of a user.

Call-Me (button) [2211, 2310]: By clicking on this button a smallerpop-up windows of time/date schedules will be displayed. The user canselect time/date when he/she wants to be contacted by phone by thesender of the electronic message. After finalizing the time/dateschedule, the user clicks a send button located within the pop-upwindow, it will automatically send an electronic message based on apredefined text to the message sender (e.g., _Sender_name_, please callme at _date_time_to further discuss your message _message_subject_line_;

See-Me (button) [2212, 2311]: By clicking on this button a smallerpop-up window of time/date schedules will be displayed. The user canselect time/date when he/she wants to meet with the sender of electronicmessage. After finalizing the time/date schedule, the user clicks a sendbutton located within the pop-up window, it will automatically send anelectronic message based on a predefined text to the message sender(e.g., _Sender_name_, please meet me at _date_time_to further discussyour message_message_subject_line_);

History (button) [2213, 2312]: By clicking on this button it will updatethe message summary frame [2104]. The message summary frame will nowdisplay all the messages that belong to the same conversation thread asthat of the message being selected (at the time of clicking the button);

5) Adaptive Learning Module (FIG. 1[107])

5.1) Adaptive Learning System (FIG. 1[107]):

The adaptive learning System [107] aims to refine the results obtainedby the prioritization engine [105] to fit as closely as possible to userbehavior. The Learning Module is independent from the prioritizationengine. It continuously monitors for any feed back signals based on theuser interaction with GUI. For example, it will monitor if attributeshave been associated or updated with respect to the message i.e. if theuser has clipped any User-notes. It will also monitor whether there arechanges in the system's keyword priorities. Various feedback signalssuch as these will be added to informational and situational contextrepository [104] and Prioritization Engine [105], and then, the messagepriority is re-evaluated [105] based on this data. This new userbehavior information will be taken into consideration while calculatingthe priority value.

5.2) Process and Implementation of Adaptive Learning System

Two approaches are used: 5.2.1) intentional input or supervised learningdata which is intentionally given by the user; and 5.2.2) unintentionalinput or unsupervised learning data which comes from the user's normaluse of the GUI.

A key word [2031] can be a name or a contact email address, URL, number,alphanumeric, or a word or set of words selected from Message Summary[2033 or 2209], Message Body [2304], Message Subject [2203], or Fromfield [2033, 2207].

5.2.1) Intentional or Supervised Learning Data Gathering:

Supervised learning methods rely on user actions to teach the systemabout prioritization. The GUI learning framework is implemented via fourpriority buttons [2303] (high, medium, low, and spam) for the keywordlearning process and the categorization. These buttons are located inthe side frame [2103] of the main application frame [2101]; and in thetoolbar panel [2302] of an individual message window ([2301], FIG. 23,23 a)

In one of the embodiments, a key word can be selected and dragged anddropped (using mouse click button or key board) on one of the prioritybuttons to assign (if it's a new key word) or change (if the key word isalready in the priority database) the key word's priority.

Users can use two methods to adapt the system: a) add or changekeywords' priority and b) change an entire message's priority.

a) Keyword Prioritization:

While reading a message (in summarized view [2105], or complete messageview [2304]), if a user wants to change the priority of a keyword,he/she can select it and drag and drop it on the following areas:

High priority [2013, also refer 2305]: the keyword priority isincreased; the word is more susceptible to appear in summaries and istaken into account in the priority

Medium priority [2014, also refer 2306]: depending on the current gradeof the keyword, priority can be reviewed to match the average (increasedor decreased)

Low priority [2015, also refer 2307]: the keyword priority is decreased;the keyword is less susceptible to appear in summaries and is not takeninto account in the priority anymore

Spam priority [2016, also refer 2308]: the keyword priority is set tozero. The key word will henceforth be rejected from message summaries.

In another embodiment, the user will also be able to enter key word(s)directly by selecting a key word message (in summarized view [2105], orcomplete message view [2304]) and then right clicking on it. A contextmenu appears which allows the user to select the appropriate categoryfor this key word (i.e., high, medium, low or spam).

The keyword(s) can also be prioritized by selecting the key word(s) andthen clicking on one of the priority buttons [2013-2016 or 2305-2308].

In other embodiment, a user can view his/her entire database of all thekeywords by double clicking on any priority button [2013-2016, or2305-08]. This will open up a new pop-up window displaying a tablecontaining all four prioritization categories and all their respectivekey words. The key words within the table can be edited (added, deleted,updated) either by manually typing or editing a key word, dragging anddropping from the message or dragging and dropping from one category toanother category in the table. By clicking on the save button, all thechanges made in the keyword table can be confirmed. Another embodimentenables a user to store his keywords database locally, electronicallysend the keyword file to another user(s) so that he/she can input ithis/her prioritization system. Another variation of the system storesthe data centrally on an organization wide basis (with specific userright assigned in terms of ability to edit or view the data).

b) Entire Message Prioritization:

In this case, the user can assign a specific priority to a completemessage entity. To this aim, the user selects the desired message [2023]in the message summary frame [2104]. Once the selection is done, theuser can either drag or drop the selection to the appropriate prioritybutton [2013-2016, or 2305-08], or right click it to open a contextualmenu and the user can choose its appropriate category. In that case, allthe key words from the message (including Message Summary [2033 or2209], Message Body [2304], Message Subject [2203], or From field [2033,2207]) extracted during the Message Parsing system [206] are assignedthe selected desired priority level.

5.2.2) Unsupervised Learning Data Collection:

The embodiments do not have to be in direct charge of the unsupervisedlearning methods. Its objective is to monitor the end-user behaviors andprovides all the collected data to the adaptive learning module [107],therefore improve the performance of the prioritization filters.

The application GUI monitors the facts that messages have beenopened/cleared/read or not, etc. that provide a feedback to theindependent adaptive learning module [107].

From a Message Summary View

The GUI sends to the external adaptive learning modules one or more ofthe following actions performed done by the user:

a) The user marks a message as cleared or attended to [2030, 2206]

b) The user opens the full content of message [FIG. 23, 23 a] bydouble-clicking on the summarized view [2023]

c) The user skips few messages in high-priority messages and selects arelatively lower priority message in the summarized view list [2105]

d) The user writes a note on a message [2029, 2210]

e) The user replies [2002] and/or forwards [2003] a message

The above described embodiments of the present invention can beintegrated with any electronic messaging client applications, and isoperable with or without that client application being launched oropened. Further, embodiments can also be an independent electronicmessage client application in itself. Embodiments of the invention canalso be versions that can be implemented on minicomputers, mainframecomputer, personal computer, hand-held computing devices, microprocessorbased or programmable consumer electronics and other like devices suchas cell phones, pagers, etc.

Embodiments of the invention can also include a functionality oftext-to-voice conversion of the summarized messages so that a user canlisten to the executive summary of his/her electronic messages.Embodiments can also be applied to include Voice Mail, Electronic Mail,Instant Message conversations, alerts, meeting requests andconfirmations, task assignments, organization-wide document search andweb search results

Thus, while there have been shown, described, and pointed outfundamental novel features of the invention as applied to severalembodiments, it will be understood that various omissions,substitutions, and changes in the form and details of the illustratedembodiments, and in their operation, may be made by those skilled in theart without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.Substitutions of elements from one described embodiment to another arealso fully intended and contemplated. The invention is defined solelywith regard to the claims appended hereto, and equivalents of therecitations therein.

TABLE 1 INHERENT FILTERS DESCRIPTION FOR Emails Filter Number: 1 FilterReference: INHERENT/CONVERSATION/PARTICIPANTS/ACTIVE Description:Increase/Decrease the relevance of an email if the participants areknown (included in the personal hierarchy) Filter WEIGHT: 0.5 RESULTCalculation: Average of the results obtained with the same calculationas the sender for each of the participants (see 1.2) EFFICIENCY Averageof the efficiency obtained with the same calculation as the senderCalculation: for each of the participants. Filter Number: 2 FilterReference: INHERENT/CONVERSATION/CURRENT_EMAIL/SENDER Description:Increase/Decrease the relevance of an email if the sender is known(included in the personal hierarchy) Filter WEIGHT: 1 RESULTCalculation: Check if the sender is in the personal hierarchy of theuser, if so RESULT is given according to its rank (0: SPAM, 0.35: LOW,0.65: MED, 1: HIGH). If not, check if the user is in the Exchangedirectory, if found the value 0.75 is assigned to RESULT. If not, checkif the email address matches the user's one, if yes assign the value0.75 else RESULT = 0 EFFICIENCY If the user is known (found either inthe personal hierarchy or in the Calculation: Exchange server)EFFICIENCY = 1, else if guessed based on the address EFFICIENCY = 0.5,else EFFICIENCY = 0 Filter Number: 3 Filter Reference:INHERENT/CONVERSATION/CURRENT_EMAIL/RECIPIENTS Description:Increase/Decrease the relevance of an email if the recipients are known(included in the personal hierarchy) Filter WEIGHT: 0.75 RESULTCalculation: Average of the results obtained with the same calculationas on the sender for each of the recipients. (see 1.2) EFFICIENCYAverage of the efficiency obtained with the same calculation as thesender Calculation: for each of the recipients. (see 1.2) Filter Number:4 Filter Reference: INHERENT/CONVERSATION/CURRENT_EMAIL/RECIPCCDescription: Increase/Decrease the relevance of an email if therecipients are in CC or BCC Filter WEIGHT: 0.75 RESULT Calculation:Count the number of recipients in CC and in BCC. Given the maximal rangeon the existing emails, assign a percentage according to the calculatednumber (if range equals 0 to 10 and number equals 6 then RESULTS = 60%).If an email has more than 25% over the CC number average, then RESULT= 1. If nobody is in CC or BCC then RESULT = 0 EFFICIENCY If somepersons are in CC or BCC, then the EFFICIENCY = 1, else Calculation:EFFICIENCY = 0.5 (no CC or BCC should always be taken into account)Filter Number: 5 Filter Reference:INHERENT/CONVERSATION/CURRENT_EMAIL/USERCC Description: Decrease therelevance of an email if the user is in CC or BCC Filter WEIGHT: 0.5RESULT Calculation: Check if the user is the direct recipient or in CCor BCC. If the user is in CC/BCC (message for information) then RESULT =0 else RESULT = 1 EFFICIENCY If the user is in CC or BCC, thenEFFICIENCY = 1, else EFFICIENCY = 0 Calculation: Filter Number: 6 FilterReference: INHERENT/CONTENT/EMAIL/SUBJECT Description: Increase/Decreasethe relevance of an email if keywords are identified in the subjectFilter WEIGHT: 0.85 RESULT Calculation: Compare the subject words to thepersonal/position/corporate/industry jargons. Result is the average ofthe score given for each of the keywords. The score is defined by therank (0: SPAM, 0.35: LOW, 0.75: MED, 1: HIGH) if existing. If not ontheir importance, compare to the range of words in the jargon. A weightof 3 is given to the personal jargon in the average, 2 for the positionand the corporate jargon and 1 for the industry. EFFICIENCY Efficiencyis based on the number of keywords matching compared to the averageCalculation: for the category (how many keywords are usually containedin the email subjects/ how sure we are of the category) + 0.5.EFFICIENCY = 0.5 if none of the jargon matched (wanted or unwantedwords), else EFFICIENCY = 1 If the language is unknown EFFICIENCY = 0Filter Number: 7 Filter Reference: INHERENT/CONTENT/EMAIL/BODYDescription: Increase/Decrease the relevance of an email based on itscontent/keywords Filter WEIGHT: 0.95 RESULT Calculation: Compare thesubject words to the personal/position/corporate/industry jargons.Result is the average of the score given for each of the keywords. Thescore is defined by the rank (0: SPAM, 0.35: LOW, 0.65: MED, 1: HIGH) ifexisting. If not on their importance, compare to the range of words inthe jargon. A weight of 3 is given to the personal jargon in theaverage, 2 for the position and the corporate jargon and 1 for theindustry. EFFICIENCY Efficiency is based on the number of keywordsmatching compared to the average Calculation: for the category (how manykeywords are usually contained in the email body/how sure we are of thecategory) + 0.5. EFFICIENCY = 0.5 if none of the jargon matched (wantedor unwanted words), else EFFICIENCY = 1 If the language is unknownEFFICIENCY = 0 Filter Number: 8 Filter Reference:INHERENT/CONTENT/ATTACHEMENT/NAME Description: Increase/Decrease therelevance of an email given the name of the attachment Filter WEIGHT:0.75 RESULT Calculation: Compare the subject words to thepersonal/position/corporate/industry jargons. Result is the average ofthe score given for each of the keywords. The score is defined by therank (0: SPAM, 0.35: LOW, 0.65: MED, 1: HIGH) if existing. If not ontheir importance, compare to the range of words in the jargon. A weightof 3 is given to the personal jargon in the average, 2 for the positionand the corporate jargon and 1 for the industry. EFFICIENCY Efficiencyis based on the number of keywords matching compared to the averageCalculation: for the category (how many keywords are usually containedin the attachment name/ how sure we are of the category) + 0.5.EFFICIENCY = 0.5 if none of the jargon matched (wanted or unwantedwords), else EFFICIENCY = 1 Filter Number: 9 Filter Reference:INHERENT/CONTENT/ATTACHEMENT/BODY Description: Increase/Decrease therelevance of an email given the content of the attachment Filter WEIGHT:1 RESULT Calculation: Compare the subject words to thepersonal/position/corporate/industry jargons. Result is the average ofthe score given for each of the keywords. The score is defined by therank (0: SPAM, 0.35: LOW, 0.65: MED, 1: HIGH) if existing. If not ontheir importance, compare to the range of words in the jargon. A weightof 3 is given to the personal jargon in the average, 2 for the positionand the corporate jargon and 1 for the industry. EFFICIENCY Efficiencyis based on the number of keywords matching compared to the averageCalculation: for the category (how many keywords are usually containedin the attachment content/how sure we are of the category) + 0.5.EFFICIENCY = 0.5 if none of the jargon matched (wanted or unwantedwords), else EFFICIENCY = 1 Filter Number: 10 Filter Reference:INHERENT/EMAIL/ATTACHEMENT/TYPE Description: Increase/Decrease therelevance of an email given the type of attachment Filter WEIGHT: 0.5RESULT Calculation: Compare the extension of the file to the most commonextensions. RESULT is the average on the files. A score of 0 is givenfor media files (swf, avi, mp3, scr, jpg . . .), 0.5 for common (txt,html . . .) and 1 for project files (office, pdf, mpp . . .). Extensionsare stored in a configuration file. EFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY = 1 of theemail contains attachment known, 0 if the attachment Calculation: isunknown or if there is no attachment. Filter Number: 11 FilterReference: INHERENT/CONVERSATION/PARTICIPANTS/INITIATOR Description:Increase/Decrease the relevance of an email if the initiator (i.e.creator) is known (included in the personal hierarchy) Filter WEIGHT:0.5 RESULT Calculation: RESULT is obtained with the same calculation asthe sender (see 1.2) EFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY is obtained with the samecalculation as the sender (see 1.2) Calculation: Filter Number: 12Filter Reference: INHERENT/CONVERSATION/INTENSITY Description: Increasethe relevance of an email based on the number of email exchanged duringthe session (day). Filter WEIGHT: 0.5 RESULT Calculation: RESULT = 0.5 +a bonus increasing for each email related to the message during thesession. Bonus is increased from 0.1 for each email above 2, up toRESULT = 1 EFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY = 1, this filter is always activeCalculation: Filter Number: 13 Filter Reference:INHERENT/CONVERSATION/REPLY_FWD Description: Increase the relevance ifthe email is a reply or a forward related to another message. FilterWEIGHT: 0.5 RESULT Calculation: RESULT = 0.5 for a typical email, RESULT= 0.75 if the email is a forward and RESULT = 1 if the email is a reply.IDEALLY, based on the content, the filter should be able to identify howmany times the email has been forwarded (if the information remains) andby whom. In that case the result might have a different behavior and theweight of the filter is increased. EFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY = 1, thisfilter is always active Calculation: Filter Number: 14 Filter Reference:INHERENT/CONTENT/EMAIL/IMPORTANCE Description: Increase/Decrease therelevance based on the sender assigned priority. Filter WEIGHT: 0.6RESULT Calculation: RESULT = 1 if the email is marked as high priority,RESULT = 0.5 if the email is marked as normal, RESULT = 0 if the emailis marked as low priority EFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY = 1 if the Importanceinformation is given in the email and Calculation: EFFICIENCY = 0 if noinformation is contained. Filter Number: 15 Filter Reference:INHERENT/CONVERSATION/QUANTITY Description: Increase the relevance basedon the number of email sent from the beginning of the conversation.Filter WEIGHT: 0.4 RESULT Calculation: RESULT = 0.5 + a bonus increasingfor each email related to the message during the session. Bonus isincreased from 0.1 for each email above the email conversation averageuntil RESULT = 1 EFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY = 1, this filter is alwaysapplicable Calculation: Filter Number: 16 Filter Reference:INHERENT/CONTENT/EMAIL/DATE Description: Increase/Decrease the relevanceof an email based on the time between the emission and the processFilter WEIGHT: 0.5 RESULT Calculation: Compare the date of emission withthe current date, RESULT = 0 if the email was emitted more than 1 weekago, RESULT = 1 − 1/7 * n where n is the number of days spent beforebeing processed if it was emitted less than 1 week ago. IDEALLY, thefilter should identify if dates are defined in the content. If dates arestill valuable, RESULT should be increased to 1. EFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY =1, this filter is always applicable Calculation: Filter Number: 17Filter Reference: INHERENT/CONTENT/EMAIL/DELIVERY Description: Increasethe relevance if the email is asking for a delivery receipt FilterWEIGHT: 0.4 RESULT Calculation: RESULT = 0.5 if no delivery receipt isasked, 1 if required EFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY = 1, this filter is alwaysapplicable Calculation: Filter Number: 18 Filter Reference:INHERENT/CONTENT/EMAIL/FORMATCHG Description: Increase the relevance ifthe email has changes in the formatting. Filter WEIGHT: 0.5 RESULTCalculation: RESULT = 0.5 if no changes occur, 1 if a word/sentence isin bold, color, highlighted or underlined compare to the rest of thedocument. EFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY = 1, this filter is always applicableCalculation: The illustrated embodiments of filters take a processedemail as an input and return a score. The score is composed of 2decimals in a range of 0 to 1: RESULT (i.e., indicating the importanceof an email given the parameters filtered) and EFFICIENCY (i.e.,indicating the surety and accuracy of the filter given the inputs).

1. A method of adaptive, user-based prioritization of electronicmessages comprising the steps of: monitoring a message queue for receiptof an electronic message; extracting statistical data associated witheach message by parsing historical information and content analysis fromthe electronic message; computing a message prioritization score for theextracted data through filter analysis, wherein the messageprioritization score is based on an overall combined situational andinherent prioritization model that incorporates a situationalprioritization value and an inherent prioritization value; determiningthe situational prioritization value utilizing a first set of filtersthat implements a curve modeling a time-dependent equation representingthe message's relative priority, where a weight is given to theimportance of the type of curve in comparison to other curves, andefficiency representing the validity of the filter at a particular time,wherein the situational prioritization value is updated during alifecycle of the electronic communication; determining the inherentprioritization value utilizing a second set of filters that implements afirst factor based on message attributes, message content analysis, andpersonal or organizational rules and policies, a second factorrepresenting an importance of the message's context dimensions beinganalyzed, and a third factor representing an estimated accuracy andvalidity based on an amount of information for the message's dimensionbeing analyzed, wherein the inherent prioritization value is furtherbased on statistical data and context analysis; associating the messageprioritization score to the respective electronic message; displaying aplurality of the electronic messages in order of the associated messageprioritization score in a graphical user interface (GUI); obtainingfeedback from a user's interaction with the GUI to analyze user behaviorso as to adapt the message parsing filter analysis; reapplying theadapted message parsing and filter analysis to recalculate the messageprioritization score; wherein the message prioritization score is afunction of Situational priority and Inherent priority according to thefollowing derived formula:Message priority=function (Situational, Inherent);Message priority=function [Situational f(event dimensions), Inherentf(content dimensions)];Situational f(event dimensions)=function (Relevance, Importance);Inherent f(content dimensions)=function (Relevance, Importance);therefore:Message priority=function [Situational f(event dimensions f(Relevance,Importance)), Inherent f(content dimensions(Relevance, Importance))];and calculating an overall priority value (PV) of a message based on theresult of at least two independent adaptive filters, the PV beingderived by the following: Filter Values (Weight, Result,Efficiency)=f(Message) Situational f(event dimensions)=f(Weight, Result,Efficiency) Inherent f(content dimensions)=f(Weight, Result, Efficiency)Importance=f(Weight, Result) Relevance=f(Efficiency)${PV} = \frac{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{n}{r_{i}e_{i}w_{i}}}{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{n}{e_{i}w_{i}}}$where: (w) is an important weight given to the filter by the system, (r)is the Result of the application of the filter to a message, (e) is theEfficiency of that filter; and PV is a decimal value between 0 and 1which can be displayed as a ranking score to the user.
 2. The method ofclaim 1, wherein the displaying step further comprises the step oflisting summarized views of all electronic messages in the GUI.
 3. Themethod of claim 1, further comprising the steps of: parsing theelectronic message for at least one of a Security Context, and InherentMetadata, and a Time factor; storing the results of the parsing in arepository of collected values; and applying the parsing results in theoverall combined situational and inherent prioritization model; whereina Security Context includes at least one of Source, Destination,Intermediate Paths, and Sensitivity; wherein an Inherent Metadataincludes at least one of a Priority Classification, Category,Conversation, and Thread; and wherein Time Factor includes at least oneof Sent, Received, Transactional Qualifications, and Acknowledgement. 4.The method of claim 1, wherein the content analysis of an internalunstructured message content involves a probabilistic correlation of alljargon files present in a user's system, and computed word scores from agiven message to select the right jargon file.
 5. The method of claim 4,further comprising the step of increasing the accuracy of the messagesummary by selecting the right jargon file as input for a Keyword(s)identification process.
 6. The method of claim 4, wherein the selectionof a jargon file defines a type of content that a message has, whereindifferent rules are applied to the electronic message depending on theselected jargon file.
 7. The method of claim 4, wherein a user createsor edits the jargon files and the industry words and jargon within thefiles.
 8. The method of claim 4, wherein centrally accessible predefinedjargon files are provided, and wherein the centrally accessible jargonfiles can be continuously updated using data files.
 9. The method ofclaim 4, wherein a hyperlink, a URL, or an email address is embedded inthe electronic message, further comprising at least one of the followingsteps: parsing the text in the <a>tags; searching the “link”, “site”,“URL” that is referred by the link; and gathering information andperforming content and context analysis on the information.
 10. Agraphical user interface (GUI) system wherein a plurality of electronicmessages, each having a full content, are dynamically arranged in anorder of prioritization based on an overall combined situational andinherent prioritization model, wherein the situational and inherentprioritization model incorporates a situational prioritization valueutilizing a first set of filters that implements a curve modeling atime-dependent equation representing the message's relative priority,where a weight is given to the importance of the type of curve incomparison to other curves, and efficiency representing the validity ofthe filter at a particular time, wherein the situational prioritizationvalue is updated during a lifecycle of the electronic communication, andwherein the situational and inherent prioritization model furtherincorporates an inherent prioritization value utilizing a second set offilters that implements a first factor based on message attributes,message content analysis, and personal or organizational rules andpolicies, a second factor representing an importance of the message'scontext dimension being analyzed, and a third factor representing anestimated accuracy and validity based on an amount of information forthe message's dimension being analyzed, wherein the inherentprioritization value is further based on statistical data and contextanalysis of the electronic message; the electronic messages aredisplayed to the user with a summarized content and a security contextof each of the plurality of electronic messages; wherein the overallcombined situational and inherent prioritization model is a function ofSituational priority and Inherent priority according to the followingderived formula:Message priority=function (Situational, Inherent);Message priority=function [Situational f(event dimensions), Inherentf(content dimensions)];Situational f(event dimensions)=function (Relevance, Importance);Inherent f(content dimensions)=function (Relevance, Importance);therefore:Message priority=function [Situational f(event dimensions f(Relevance,Importance)), Inherent f(content dimensions(Relevance, Importance))];and wherein an overall priority value (PV) of a message is calculatedbased on the result of at least two independent adaptive filters, the PVbeing derived by the following: Filter Values (Weight, Result,Efficiency)=f(Message) Situational f(event dimensions)=f(Weight, Result,Efficiency) Inherent f(content dimensions)=f(Weight, Result, Efficiency)Importance=f(Weight, Result) Relevance=f(Efficiency)${PV} = \frac{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{n}{r_{i}e_{i}w_{i}}}{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{n}{e_{i}w_{i}}}$where: (w) is an important weight given to the filter by the system, (r)is the Result of the application of the filter to a message, (e) is theEfficiency of that filter; and PV is a decimal value between 0 and 1which can be displayed as a ranking score to the user.
 11. The system ofclaim 10, wherein the summarized content comprises keyword(s), keyhyperlinks, context information of the keywords, the key hyperlinks andkey sentences.
 12. The system of claim 11, wherein the contextinformation is in the range of two to three words before and after thekeyword.
 13. The system of claim 11, wherein the context information istext structure including punctuation.
 14. The system of claim 10,wherein the GUI appearance of the keywords is highlighted or a differentstyle; and wherein the context is displayed as generalized text.
 15. Thesystem of claim 10, wherein the full content of a message is viewed bycontrolling a pointing device as it points to the summarized messagecontent, resulting in the opening of a new window.
 16. The system ofclaim 10, wherein a priority categorization icon visually indicates theoverall priority categorization status of at least one of the pluralityof electronic messages; wherein the overall priority categorization isone of very high, high, medium, low, and someday.
 17. The system ofclaim 10, wherein the overall priority score value of at least one ofthe plurality of electronic messages is visually represented as aranking bar; wherein the ranking bar changes color depending upon theprioritization categorization of the electronic message.
 18. The systemof claim 10, further comprising an interactive portion of the GUI as auser's work bench, wherein the summarized content is an open action itemthat is presented in a priority order customized to the user's workbehavior.
 19. The system of claim 18, wherein a message list view isupdated after at least one of receiving an incoming message thatunderwent prioritization, and performing a search/sort operation. 20.The system of claim 18, wherein the work bench is cleared of aparticular electronic message by activation of a “clear” button,resulting in the removal and marking of at least one selected summarizedmessage.
 21. The system of claim 18, wherein activation of a “fastaction” button sends a predefined message response to a message sender,and the predefined message response contains scheduling preference ofthe user along with message reference information.
 22. The system ofclaim 21, wherein a draft of the predefined message is customized tosuit the user's work habits.
 23. The system of claim 22, whereinactivation of a Call-Me button causes the display of a pop-up windowshowing the time/date schedules for selection by the user; whereinselection by the user indicates a time/date for phone contact by thesender of the electronic message, and an electronic message is sent tothe sender containing a predefined text to the message sender.
 24. Thesystem of claim 22, wherein activation of a See-Me button causes thedisplay of a pop-up window showing time/date schedules for selection bythe user; wherein selection by the user indicates a time/date formeeting with the sender of the electronic message, and an electronicmessage is sent to the sender containing a predefined text to themessage sender.
 25. The system of claim 10, wherein the user sets theprioritization of the electronic messages to be at lest one of high,medium, low, and spam.
 26. The system of claim 10, wherein a user writesquick notes and clips them to the electronic messages while reviewingthe message content.
 27. The system of claim 16, wherein activation of auser-note button opens a pop-up note pad window for the entry of thenotes, and where the notes can be edited or saved.
 28. The system ofclaim 10, wherein the plurality of electronic messages are sorted andarranged based on overall priority scores, associated user notes, andconversation thread.
 29. The system of claim 10, wherein a dynamicSummarization /re-summarization of the plurality of electronic messagesis performed based on heuristic feedback from the user's interactionwith the GUI.
 30. The system of claim 10, wherein the GUI can be a popwindow with customizable views that can stay open with other applicationwindows simultaneously open on the user's personal computer or othercomputing devices.